Very interesting. I knew that we don't "make" hydrogen, but that's the term the
media uses when reporting it.
Heard a couple of interesting stories on the news this weekend and this
morning. One was on the wind farms in West Texas. Apparently a lot of ranchers
are leasing their land to the government for wind farms to supplement the $$
lost in the foundering cattle business. They also interviewed one rancher who
was opposed to installing the wind machines saying that the ranchers who took
advantage of the opportunity were not being considerate to their neighbors when
they allowed the government to erect hundreds and hundreds of wind machines as
far as they eye could see. His point was that he thought this is a fad industry
which would fall by the wayside and, when wind power was no longer useful,
there would be all those machines cluttering up the view. I wonder if his is a
majority or minority view.
The other story was how restaurants in Southern California are having to lockup
their waste cooking oil bins because thieves come in during the night and pump
them dry. People whose livelihood is the legal pumping of this waste oil are
finding it hard to make a living. Apparently waste cooking oil is the new
"gold."> Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 02:10:29 -0500> From: [email protected]> To:
[email protected]> CC: [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]> Subject: Re: [ot_caving] an
option to drilling> > What makes ISOLATING hydrogen expensive is the energy
cost.> (You do not make hydrogen. It is the most abundant element in the>
universe. Yes, you probably know that anyway)> If you consider "free energy"
such as tidal forces - (something that's> only just beginning to be harnessed -
think 'wind turbines', but> underwater) - wind, hydrothermal, solar and nuclear
(all of these are> "FREE" - even nuclear is nearly free - it's just that the
initial> setup costs are astronomical!)> Using a source of energy such as
natural gas or petroleum to isolate> hydrogen is ridiculous.> It's ridiculous
to make hydrogen with electrical current from the grid> too - because that's
like using coal to make electricity to isolate> hydrogen. I don't know what the
loss factor is, but I'm guessing> that for every 1000 watts of electrical
energy you use at home, that> energy started out as 1100 or 1500 watts -
because of line and> transformer losses - you end up with less than was
generated in the> first place.> And perhaps there are better ways than
electrolysis to split hydrogen> from water - or maybe to remove oxygen from
water so that you've got> only hydrogen left... But however it's done - NO,
there just ain't no> way to get more energy from oxidizing hydrogen than it
takes to break> it from oxygen! That's just one of those basic laws of
physics.> Running your car on water is a bunch of HOOEY. It's hard to believe>
news reporters are so stupid that they could be duped into covering> crap like
that. Just like that stupid perpetual motion machine. Every> system "looses"
energy at every transition.> > Back to where I was coming from, was that "free
energy" is virtually> impossible to use in an automobile of any technology. You
cant drive> around with a hydroelectric dam strapped to the bed of your truck.>
Nor would you be able to get under even the tallest overpasses with a> wind
turbine attached to it. Despite how excited everyone got back> in the 50's
about powering your car with a small nuclear reactor - its> just not practical.
But pure hydrogen is more energy concentrated> than even gasoline - and it
doesn't pollute.> > I don't know ANYONE that can synthesize gasoline. I sure
wish I did!> But even I can make alcohol with a bunch of barley and corn, rice
or> wheat. (barley contains that magic enzyme "amylase" that converts> starches
into sugar - sugar then feeds yeast that excrete alcohol).> I can also isolate
little small amounts of hydrogen with electricity> or by dropping zinc into
hydrochloric acid - (the latter being far> more expensive but a whole lot
faster)> > Maybe there's a better way to 'keep' hydrogen. Consider perhaps a>
molecule that holds huge groups or chains of hydrogen together just> like
carbon does in hydrocarbons. Maybe its possible to use> electricity and
hydrogen in some undiscovered way to turn hydrogen> into a hydrogen based
man-made 'hydrocarbon-like' molecule that could> replace gasoline.> > When you
think about it, is there ANY fuel that DOESN'T contain> hydrogen or
hydrocarbons of one form or another? Even FOOD contains> hydrocarbons in the
form of carbohydrates.> > Is there any fuel that does NOT contain hydrogen? I
don't think so.> Not unless it's plutonium or uranium.....> > -WaV> > On
6/21/08, Louise Power <[email protected]> wrote:> >> > I keep hearing
that it's more expensive to make hydrogen than the amount you> > would save.
How does your suggestion jibe with that?>> > [email protected]>> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------> Give
this to a friend: [email protected]> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[email protected]> For additional commands, e-mail:
[email protected]>
